Quote:
Originally Posted by Makarov
If only the WRP had a candidate of Muslim or Jewish faith, then we could find out.
|
They have five visible minorities I believe; I have no idea what religious views they may have. But why does it only have to be a WRP candidate? If religious views of candidates are so important, why aren't other parties being scrutinized in this regard?
Quote:
Can't answer that question until we get a decision from the Supreme Court in Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission v. William Whatcott, et al. (some time this year hopefully.)
In any event, in my view, its irrelevant. Statements don't have to constitute "hate speech" before the electorate can legitimately say "I don't want people who hold these views to be in charge of important decisions that affect my province." For example, I think that if a candidate openly believed in a flat earth or a 10,000 year old earth, those are also legitimate things to discuss in the context of an election campaign.
|
I agree with this. Ignorant views are ignorant views and certainly should be examined when someone is running for public office. What I'm interested in is the line for determining when something should be "tolerated". I think if it's constituted as "hate speech", or advocating violence, then it shouldn't be tolerated. But just because someone sees something as a sin isn't enough in my opinion. From what I've read, I'm in the minority though as clearly we aren't meant to tolerate those religious nuts.